Role of Culture in Technologically Advanced Societies - Essay Example

?LECTURE Introduction: New socialities and new communities Introduction Through the relational models theory formulated by Fiske (1992), there is a better understanding of how people relate to each other to forms social relationships. This is because as much as humans enter the world as individual beings, the fact that relationships begin developing right from birth and this continues till death means that we are more of social being rather than individual beings. Through the collection of a number of relationships and inter-connectivity in relationships, a society is established. Societies are also expanded into communities when the various interactions that exist between people yield a number of outcomes and consequential results. Indeed, social interactions and relationships have fulfilled several aims and social psychological aims of people. But in ages past, people have been more familiar with a traditional form of social relations whereby the people we come across in person become the only people we continue to relate to in our own unique social worlds. With technological advancement however, much of this trend has changed as technology has created an avenue for people to establish a social setting without really having to come to meet on a personal basis (Fiske, 1992). Sociality and communities have been digitized and advanced through technology and by the power of the internet through various social network platforms. In this essay, there is a careful scrutiny to new sociality and new communities as substitutes of old sociality and communities. As part of the scrutiny, the role of culture in technologically advanced societies shall be invested to come to conclusions with the merits and demerits associated with new sociality and communities. Role of culture in technologically advanced societies Culture may generally be explained as the way in which a group of people live. This means it is the way of life of people and thus entails key variables that distinguish these people including language, meals, dressing, courtesy, social perception and interactivity. Culture has always been a key part of societies and communities. This is because most often than not, any given society is made up of people with core cultural similarities and the more these people are able to share these cultural similarities, the better it is for them to have their communities established (Wellman, B. et al., 2001). In cases where there are cultural differences, tolerance and acceptability have been identified to be the key to developing an effective community. Indeed, as much as this principle applies in the traditional setting, it has also been found to be useful and influential in this era of technologically advanced societies (Castells, 2001). Using various social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Whatsapp as examples, it can be noted that there is virtually none of these social media network that allows an open form of networking that lacks permissiveness by end users to decide who will be their social members and those who will not. This means that hosts and makers of these social networks understand the need for any two people to get along culturally well before relationships can be established in a technologically advanced society. Culture therefore plays the role of defining the kind of societies that can be established and how effective these societies will be once they are advanced into communities. Culture also determines whether or not people will have their social psychological needs satisfied in technologically advanced societies. Approaches to Social Network Theory Generally, social network theory makes use of two major approaches or schemes namely nodes and ties. As far as nodes are concerned, reference made to individual actors who are found within the network, while ties refer to the nature of relationships that are established between these actors (Granovetter, 1983). Social network theory has actually been related to traditional sociological studies, where it has been said that social networking theory is differentiated from traditional sociological studies by way of the elements that motivate and promote effective social establishment. For example whiles traditional sociological studies hold the argument that attributes of individual actors is the most important element in defining the outlook of any given relationship, social networking theory posits that the deciding factor is the relationships and ties (Shirky, 2008). This means that the attributes of the nodes such as smartness, friendliness and courtesies would all not be important determinants of the kind of society and community that will be established between one person and others on the work. Rather, for a successful society to be established in a social network there should be an effective nature of relationship. Consequentially, ties are more important than nodes in social networking. Indeed, there have been a number of studies that have attempted to explain why this situation holds. First and foremost, it has been said that in social networking, most social media platforms make it almost impossible to know much about the attributes of the nodes as compared to the relationships and ties (Burkhardt, 1994). Again, it has been noted that most users of social media networks have different attitudes towards social networking and so it is only through their relationships and ties that their compatibility with other users can be established. How social media networking has influenced modern interactivity One of the propositions of commonly used in social networking theory has it that “individuals or groups with homophilous relations are likely to share similar attitudes” in a given network (Kadushin, 2004, p. 4). What this means that ideally, in socialities and communities, there should be a very limited range of compatibility according to the similarities of attitudes that are shared by nodes. However, this notion seems to be totally differentiated through social media networking. The reason for this point is that social media networking actually seeks to bridge the gap that exists between any two nodes who find themselves on the network by use of variables other than homophilous relations. In a typical social media platform such as YouTube, two people may become linked in a common network and form a society not because these two people have any homophilous relations and for that matter similar attitudes but that one of these people have uploaded a video that the other party has been looking for in ages. Social media networking has therefore come to influence modern interactivity by breaking basic principles that defined how people would get along and get together. Through this influence, modern interactivity has become more enhanced and forthcoming than it used to be before. Today, social media networking makes the circulation of news and information more accessible than they used to be because of the small world phenomenon, which creates overlaps in person’s personal networks (Kadushin, 2004). Through this phenomenon, it is possible that between nodes A and B, different people outside their networks will be known by each other and so with time, the people known outside from the network will become part of the network, making interactivity more efficient. Challenges of New Sociality and Communities From the discussions had so far, the influence of new media and for that matter social media network in new sociality and community has been found to be very enormous and tremendous. Basically, a lot of posit factors have been discussed as to why new sociality and new communities may be preferable to old sociality and communities. Regard of all of these merits however, there are a number of challenges that can be associated with new sociality and communities. Even though Castells (2001) have mentioned privatization of sociability as a merit of new sociality, there seem to be several other studies that have followed to refute the notion that new sociality and new communities allows for the kind of privatization that Castells talks about. This is because most social media platforms, which are used for establishing these socialities and communities, have been accused of refusing to guarantee cyber security in terms of permeability (Burt, 2008). For example with almost social networks, hosts of accounts do not have the privilege of deciding what someone may post on their walls or timelines until these comments have come to the public domain. It would have been expected for instance that for each post or comment, there will be a notification so that the account host can decide whether or not to make these comments and posts public. It is therefore possible that the hard earned reputation and personality may easily be tinted with a single post from a person with a personal agenda. In new sociality and new community therefore, it is very difficult to determine the rules of engagement. Conclusion New sociality and new communities may hardly be replaced with the old system in today’s era of technological advancement. In effect, the best way to live with this new phenomenon is to continue to study about its implications, and effects. This way, it is possible to make a better use of the various platforms on which new socialities and new communities such as social media networks (Burt, 2008). As social media networks gain popularity and fame, it is important that people will not jump unto them by the mere fact that all others are doing it. At an individual level, it is important that people get to understand the implications and effects of using these platforms. It is also important that one acquaints him or herself with all the rules of engagement involved in using a particular social media network. This way, much caution will be taken and the possibility of becoming victims of various forms of disadvantages that these platforms provide will be catered for. More importantly, the discussions had so far has established the need for nodes on various social networks to make good use of their traditional cultures in determining their rules of engagement on the networks. Once this principle will be adhered to, the possibility of new sociality and new communities becoming more evil than good will be eliminated. REFERENCE LIST Burkhardt, M.E. 1994.. Social interaction effects following a technological change: a longitudinal investigation. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 869-898. Burt, R.S. 2008.. Structural holes: the social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Castells, M. 2001. The Internet Galaxy, Oxford: OUP, chapter 4: Virtual Communities or Network Society? Fiske, Alan P. 1992. The Four Elementary Forms of Sociality: Framework for a Unified Theory of Social Relations. Psychological Review, 99:689-723. Granovetter, M. 1983. The Strength of Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited In Sociological Theory, Vol. 1. 1983., pp. 201-233. Kadushin, 2004, Introduction to Social Network Theory. [Online] http://www.communityanalytics.com/Portals/0/Resource_Library/Social%20Network%20Theory_Kadushin.pdf [May, 9, 2013] Shirky, C. 2008. Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing without organizations, Penguin Press: New York. Wellman, B. et al. 2001. Does the Internet Increase, Decrease, or Supplement Social Capital?, Social Networks, Participation, and Community Commitment, in American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 436-455 NEW MEDIA CULTURE ONLINE DATING Introduction It was an open secret in the early days of technological development that the use of the internet was very much associated with business and general academic research. In those days, the use of the internet was also very limited in usage to very few people in the professional and scholastic fields (Whitty, Baker and Inman, 2007). The case is however different today because internet usage has become more common with a global usage, predicted to reach 2 billion users by 2015. As more and more people get unto the internet, the purposes and usability of the internet also become changed and varying. If for nothing at all, each of these 2 billion people have different desires and needs that has to be fulfilled by the internet. It is for this reason that there have been so many additions to the functionality of the internet including dating. Today, it is true to say that technology has taken headway in almost all aspects of human life including the development of interpersonal relationships. Relationship formation had largely been associated with face-to-face encounter with people until the advent of telephone when people started building relationships also based on aural attractiveness on the phone. But today, McKenna, Green and Gleason (2002) identify a new trend of relationship formation that is based on the internet. Indeed, internet related relationship formation is a quite new and directly associated with the advancement in technology. In the essay, factors that are responsible for the popularity of online dating and the effects of thereof will be thoroughly discussed using existing research works and literature. Background to online dating Even though online dating comes in different forms and presented through different platforms of services, there are three major generalized services that have been linked to online dating. These services are access, communication and matching (Aube and Koestner, 1995). By access reference is being made to that service that is rendered to the end user to be exposed to as many potential partners as possible and have the opportunity to evaluate these partners, whom otherwise they would have been unlikely to meeting them (Finkel et al, 2012). Access is always possible because these dating sites compile as many profiles of users as possible so that clients who access their sites and enter some key search clues will be directed to the profiles of these users on the other side. Communication also refers to a platform created to make the exchange of information between two users possible. For most dating sites, the tradition is that computer-mediated communication avenues are first used by any two potential partners before any form of personal meeting can take place (Whitty, 2008). This is ensured as the exchange of personal contact information such as e-mail address and phone numbers are prohibited till a limited time of computer-mediated communication is over. Finally, matching takes place when the site hosts or service providers themselves use a number of algorithms to determine best correspondents and thus match them as potential couples. The selection or pairing is done with the idea that any match that is given forms the best compatible partners as possible. In fact, due to the ease with which these online dating works for most people, they have always considered it as the best avenue to get hooked up to potential partners as easily as possible. The gender factor in online dating Once dating takes place between two people, it can be expected that gender issues will factor prominently in discussing online dating. For the purposes of this essay however, it will be mentioned that the gender factor is not discussed merely for the sake of matching two same sexes or opposite sex partners. Rather, this discussion looks at some of the key characteristics that male and female exhibit in online dating portals, especially in cases where male users are looking for female partners and vice versa. Research has showed that between men and women, men are more likely to initiate contact in online dating (Machin and Van Leeuwen, 2003). This could be generally understandable as in the real social world this has been the norm in most cultures. However, further studies have also showed that once contact has been established, women show much commitment towards the contact and thus prefer using non-verbal substitutes that would seem as real as possible in communication (Whitty, Baker and Inman, 2007). Some of these are non-verbal substitutes include laughing and emphasising physical attractiveness. Again in the traditional social world, men are more attracted to women by sight and so it is just self explanatory as to why this would be replicated in online dating. On the part of men, they express themselves better more trying to describe touch online. This means that just as women are attracted in real world terms by touch, men would like to make this applicable to them while dating online. All in all, it takes the female to understanding the rhythms of physical behaviour in males to succeed in online dating and vice versa. Theoretical context of online dating Theoretically, there are a number of concepts and frameworks that can be used to explain why online dating seem to work and be so popular among many internet users. One of these is the social penetration theory, which was formulated by Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor in 1973. The social penetration theory generally explains that when two people involved in any relationship allow their relationship to develop in a gradual and orderly fashion, their interpersonal relationship is likely to develop from shallow and non-intimate standards to deeper and more intimate levels (Machin and Thornborrow, 2003). Indeed, several provisions in online dating make the applicability of the social penetration theory possible. For example at the initial levels of online dating, most dating sites including RSVP ensures that the levels of closeness is made to proceed at a very gradual level and so there is always relatively shallow involvement at the initial stages. At such early stages for instance, it may be prohibited to exchange personal contact information but as time goes on, and the parties involved get to know each other pretty well, the level of closeness is made to get more intimate with the exchange avenues created for more communication to take place (Asch, 1946). Again, online dating has most of the provisions of real world relationship building that makes the growth of relationships possible. In real world relationships, parties involved are able to talk, smile, touch, exchange gifts, and get flirty at times. Though physical contact may be absent in online dating, much of these are still possible through the use of universal language of online dating. Most of these universal languages of online dating have virtually everything that a real world dating has including hugs, kisses, smiley faces, wings, laughing and poking. Weaknesses associated with online dating Even though a lot of factors may be assigned to why many people today prefer online dating and use it even when they are involved in real world dating, there are a number of weaknesses that also come with online dating. One of the commonest weaknesses that can be mentioned is the problem with selective truth telling. Indeed when filling out online dating profile, it is only specific information that is asked from the person who is filling out the forms. Therefore, the one who is going to be the potential partner someday would never really have the opportunity of knowing all about this person. Secondly, there is no guarantee that information presented will be nothing but the truth. The online dating venture has actually been described as a competitive market for love-search where it takes much competitive advantage to win customers (Glaser, Dixit and Green, 2002). To most people who fill out forms therefore, the best and only competitive advantage they tend to use is to portray themselves in ways that they deem acceptable by a larger part of society where their demand would go up. When one is therefore reading the profile of another person online, there cannot be any guarantee on the frankness of the information being read. In modern times when cyber crimes continues to be on the increase, the possibility of using online dating sites and networks as platforms for criminal cyber activities cannot be ruled out. There are indeed studies that have indicated how some people; mostly men have been defrauded through the activities of online dating when after they exposed their account information to their partners (Langenderfer and Shimp, 2001). Conclusion Modernity has indeed taken charge of almost every aspect of human lives including the way any two people relate and get along with each other. One of the forums that largely accounts for modern trends and changes is the use of internet assisted dating portal. Online dating has become one of the best ways of substituting for the traditional forms of dating that have existed since the beginning of human relations. Today, the pressures of work and other socio-economic activities make it somewhat too difficult for people to find sufficient to get along with each other. Therefore, online dating is used by most of these people as a substitute. From the discussions so far, a number of factors that makes online dating effective and highly replicable of traditional dating has been identified. It was established that online dating makes up for the social penetration theory and so it is not difficult for intimate relationships to be developed from an initial shallow encounter. The merits that come with online dating were also outlined to include the fact that online dating makes accessibility easier. All of these notwithstanding, online dating have been identified to have some key weaknesses, which if not checked could come with devastating effects to users. To people who actually want to use online dating portals as their preferred means of social interactivity, it is recommended that a lot of casual and time is taken in coming to know the true identity of their partners before getting along with any forms of intimate exchanges. REFERENCE LIST Asch, S. E. 1946. Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258–290. Aube, J., & Koestner, R. 1995. Gender characteristics and relationship adjustment: Another look at similarity complementarity hypotheses. Journal of Personality, 63, 879–904. Fenkel et al, 2012, Online Dating: A Critical Analysis From the Perspective of Psychological Science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 131 3 –66. Sage. Glaser, J., Dixit, J., & Green, D. P. 2002. Study hate crime with the Internet: What makes racists advocate racial violence? Journal of Social Issues, 581, 177-193. Langenderfer, J., & Shimp, A. 2001. Consumer vulnerability to scams. Psychology and marketing, 18 7, 763-783. Machin, D. and Thornborrow, J, 2003 ‘Branding and Discourse: the case of Cosmopolitan’. Discourse and Society, 144 pp: 453-271 Machin, D. and Van Leeuwen, T. 2003 Global schemas and local discourses in Cosmopolitan in Journal of Sociolinguistics 74 pp: 493 – 512. McKenna, K.Y.A., Green, A.S., & Gleason, M.E.J. 2002. Relationship formation on the Internet: What’s the big attraction? Journal of Social Issues, 581, 9-31. Whitty, M. T., Baker, A. J., & Inman, J. A. Eds. 2007. Online matchmaking. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Whitty, M.T. 2008. Revealing the real me, searching for the actual you: Presentations of self on an internet dating site. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 1707-1723. Read More